Change Your Image
jmfgwork
Reviews
The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996)
Pretends to Be for Adults
Of course, I agree with movie-Flynt's views regarding the 1st Amendment. I agree with his views concerning Christianity. I even agree with his views regarding pornography ... but I don't watch movies to agree with them. This is a problem when your film's only reason for existing is as an impassioned plea for Freedom of Speech, (which necessitates the ability to accept things one will hate and disagree with).
This movie misses every chance to challenge us by making its antagonists more disgusting, cartoonish, and lame than the alternative which is a hack's cheat which helps no one. Ever. It's because of movies like this we here in the U. S. are further than ever from understanding what the 1st Amendment protects us from/demands from us.
As I write this, a new wave of authoritarian puritanism masquerading as moral outrage has taken ahold of this country (this time sans Jesus), the Flynt's of the world have been taken along with it and sunk in the court of public opinion to no challenge, and because of movies like this, no one: a) notices and b) is prepared to do anything about if they do.
It would've been more interesting to see how Flynt exploited his workers, or actual spread-eagle shots, or his other four wives... it would've been great to see things we wouldn't be able to accept, to turn this Angel into a Devil and twist it again until we don't know which is which, you know his real life has plenty of opportunities for such challenges. Whose life doesn't?
Shame on Milos.
The Founder (2016)
Fast Food
The Evils of Capitalism™ photographed as flatteringly as a Big Mac on a menu. It's a 2016 product if there ever was one. Self-identifying all parts of its vileness with a smirk and a shrug. The totems are as iconic as the arches. The cross, Republicanism, selling the NT with contempt, "McDonald's is about families," Kroc not figuring out the model until one of the Tribe takes him by the hand, "it's the name" ... it's all so streamlined, so simple, and so tasty it could only be told this way. One day works like this will be looked at the same way the Protocols are today, in the meantime it's good stuff if you take it as a McChicken, i.e. A one-off guilty pleasure, tricking the body into thinking it's receiving sustenance. Beware though, anything more will give you cultural diabetes.
Twin Peaks (1990)
About Itself
The question isn't "Who killed Laura Palmer?" It's "What is this?" Its secret is it knows it's a show. A mystery show. It's about its struggle to keep itself a mystery. As much as any other piece of narrative media, the mystery staying a mystery that engages is the entire point, the main novelty here being that it's overtly self-conscious of the fact, as all of its clues serve to point to this as the thing to be solved. Sadly, it's overmatched by Bob/TV.